Not even gonna click the link are you? Literally the first thing you will see is a black face.

Sent from my XT907 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

it speaks to the ability to empathize. many people are "tough on crime" until they see someone get poo on for something they could see themselves doing, such as accidentally violating a concealed carry law or nearly killing their child by leaving it in a hot car for hours. the context of a crime only matters when it's conceivable that they could see themselves being "victimized" by the state (i.e. being punished for violating a law as written); otherwise it's "don't do the crime if you can't do the time"

and there is something to the post re: young black men; specifically, they are "otherized" in a way that makes it difficult for people to empathize, even when their actions seem to align neatly with ideology. for example, look at how the NRA and ronald "literally the devil" reagan reacted when the black panthers were open carrying in california.

Meh everyone on all sides of the issue agree that firearms owners need to be more aware of their responsibilities as gun owners for lots of different reasons, and it's not like New Jersey is on the other side of the country - seems to me that PA owners would have known and complained about this for a while, especially since almost half the states in the country apparently don't honor PAs permit system for some reason.

Yeah the DA is looking for something, but there's no excuse for this woman to be ignorant of the law in this particular case.

Whats hilarious is the National Review trying to convince us of her being deserving of a lighter treatment on a gun offense based on the fact shes poor and works hard. And being black helps. HAHAHA

You're one of users on here who cries on and on and on and on about how our prisons are overpopulated with citizens who've committed "victimless" crimes, such as repeat marijuana possession. I'm pretty sure all of those people were aware of the laws they were breaking too, regardless of how petty they may be.

Yet when someone faces a ridiculous sentence for something petty and stupid you say "good they deserve it" because it involves a gun.

New Jersey is literally the only state that has these stupid laws. There are other states that either don't allow CCW or don't honor other state CCWs but they slow you to travel thru their state, just leave the gun locked away in your vehicle until you pass thru.

it speaks to the ability to empathize. many people are "tough on crime" until they see someone get poo on for something they could see themselves doing, such as accidentally violating a concealed carry law or nearly killing their child by leaving it in a hot car for hours. the context of a crime only matters when it's conceivable that they could see themselves being "victimized" by the state (i.e. being punished for violating a law as written); otherwise it's "don't do the crime if you can't do the time"

and there is something to the post re: young black men; specifically, they are "otherized" in a way that makes it difficult for people to empathize, even when their actions seem to align neatly with ideology. for example, look at how the NRA and ronald "literally the devil" reagan reacted when the black panthers were open carrying in california.

While I'm sure there are people out there that are exactly as you describe, that's certainly not the way I or a lot of other people see things... those of us that are able to use discernment and see that every situation is different and should be treated as such.

I feel the same exact way about drug laws, as someone has already mentioned. I don't do drugs, illegal ones or otherwise, but I don't think it should be a jail time offense if someone smokes one joint or even possesses enough to be considered a dealer, regardless of what the actual law says, especially if it's their first offense.

In this particular situation, as I already stated, it is absolutely on the lady to be aware of the law in NJ... she has a responsibility as a gun owner to know where she can and cannot carry it, I don't dispute that. However, if she is an otherwise law abiding citizen, this is her first offense (as far as I know it is) and there weren't any other incriminating circumstances (she was waving the gun around, pointed it at the officer, something like that) there's no reason to go after her for the maximum sentence under the law. That just doesn't make sense and is contrary to what the justice system is supposed to be about.

You're one of users on here who cries on and on and on and on about how our prisons are overpopulated with citizens who've committed "victimless" crimes, such as repeat marijuana possession. I'm pretty sure all of those people were aware of the laws they were breaking too, regardless of how petty they may be.

Yet when someone faces a ridiculous sentence for something petty and stupid you say "good they deserve it" because it involves a gun.

New Jersey is literally the only state that has these stupid laws. There are other states that either don't allow CCW or don't honor other state CCWs but they slow you to travel thru their state, just leave the gun locked away in your vehicle until you pass thru.

That just doesn't make sense and is contrary to what the justice system is supposed to be about.

Yeah, law is supposed to include discretion and punishments are supposed to fit the crime. In the age of mandatory sentences and overly aggressive prosecutors this has flown out the window to some degree.

The media hypes the cases so maybe they are that common but who knows.

it speaks to the ability to empathize. many people are "tough on crime" until they see someone get poo on for something they could see themselves doing, such as accidentally violating a concealed carry law or nearly killing their child by leaving it in a hot car for hours. the context of a crime only matters when it's conceivable that they could see themselves being "victimized" by the state (i.e. being punished for violating a law as written); otherwise it's "don't do the crime if you can't do the time"

and there is something to the post re: young black men; specifically, they are "otherized" in a way that makes it difficult for people to empathize, even when their actions seem to align neatly with ideology. for example, look at how the NRA and ronald "literally the devil" reagan reacted when the black panthers were open carrying in california.

Thats why you never tell the police anything, whatever you say can and will be used against you. If she would just have gave the officer her DL and Registration, she would have just got a ticket and this whole mess would not have happened.

Thats why you never tell the police anything, whatever you say can and will be used against you. If she would just have gave the officer her DL and Registration, she would have just got a ticket and this whole mess would not have happened.

here ya go. "can and will be used against you." yes sir, no sir, thank you, goodbye." Don't joke, don't explain be all business.

i was providing context to the exchange between you and porn shop clerk. also not all of my post dealt with race or gender but instead the willingness of "tough on crime" types to suddenly soften their stances on things like breaking concealed carry or child baking laws when they have or conceivably could commit the same crimes and face the same punishments. it's funny how laws are "stupid" to some people when they could conceivably be used to put them behind bars but other crimes that are only committed by "others" well..don't do the crime if you can't do the time imo